A wet dream is involuntary. You don't even know you're doing it. You're asleep. And well, the other one......

primuspilus

But a wet dream involves subconscious thoughts and yes many times people wake up in the middle of them and don't (or simply can't) try to stop . There is a whole school of thought which says that subconscious thought and desires should and can be controlled because they are products of our conscious desire for sin (I don't actually hold to that, but the theory does exist).

I take my priest advice that while masturbation is a disordered act and not a good thing to partake of, it still does not bar a person from reception of Communion. Receiving frequently can actually lesson ones desire to commit this act. I have recently found this to be true, I stood away from Communion for two years because of great confusion and desire not to make a sacrilegious reception of the Eucharist. However when I started to receive again regularly not that long ago, I noticed that my passion and desire to commit this act actually declined. I can't explain it other then it is the grace of God which is lessening my desire for this disordered habit, but it does seem to be true in my case.

Logged

Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.-- Gustave Flaubert

A wet dream is involuntary. You don't even know you're doing it. You're asleep. And well, the other one......

primuspilus

But a wet dream involves subconscious thoughts and yes many times people wake up in the middle of them and don't (or simply can't) try to stop . There is a whole school of thought which says that subconscious thought and desires should and can be controlled because they are products of our conscious desire for sin (I don't actually hold to that, but the theory does exist).

I take my priest advice that while masturbation is a disordered act and not a good thing to partake of, it still does not bar a person from reception of Communion. Receiving frequently can actually lesson ones desire to commit this act. I have recently found this to be true, I stood away from Communion for two years because of great confusion and desire not to make a sacrilegious reception of the Eucharist. However when I started to receive again regularly not that long ago, I noticed that my passion and desire to commit this act actually declined. I can't explain it other then it is the grace of God which is lessening my desire for this disordered habit, but it does seem to be true in my case.

May God continue to bless you with His grace!

Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.

How is it a sin? Its something that happens naturally like peeing the bed. Your body vacates the stuff all on its own.

How can you say it's natural? Nature is affected by sin and death, so we have no idea what "natural" bodily functions are. "It's natural" is the same argument the homosexual crowd uses. It may be natural to any of us, but that does not make it objectively natural.

I do not think that you can equate masturbation and homosexuality. My guess is that something greater than 99% of all males masturbate. I don't think that there are anywhere near that number riding on the Hershey Highway. Using this theory, one would seem far more "natural" than the other.

On the other hand, tying masturbation to homosexuality does bring the potential sinfulness of the former more into focus, particularly for those like me that consider homosexuality a sinful way of life. If there is nothing sinful about ejaculation, why would it make a difference where it is done (other than the clear scriptural prohibitions against adultery, fornication, and one sex laying with the same sex as they would with another). However, the afore mentioned prohibitions usually have some deeper societal reason than simply “don’t do it there”. I could see where masturbation would have the same societal prohibition if a person preferred masturbation to marital sex. We also have the scriptural command to give our spouses their due. I am not sure the same would apply to a single person, or someone “taking care of a problem” when the spouse is not able (or for that matter, when they think enough of their spouse NOT to use them as a sex toy). In the latter case, it would be nice if the wife said “I’m sorry dear, but I am really tired tonight” you could reply “No problem honey, I can take care of this myself”. As it is, however, it seems that the only acceptable way to have sex is within the context of marital copulation. And yet, there are even those who would say that is “dirty”, particularly if either of the partners actually enjoyed it.

Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.

That is certainly something to keep in mind. It would be doubtful that God would lessen the desire for something that is OK to do. So, your experience is useful in arriving at a satisfactory conclusion to this question.

A wet dream is involuntary. You don't even know you're doing it. You're asleep. And well, the other one......

primuspilus

But a wet dream involves subconscious thoughts and yes many times people wake up in the middle of them and don't (or simply can't) try to stop . There is a whole school of thought which says that subconscious thought and desires should and can be controlled because they are products of our conscious desire for sin (I don't actually hold to that, but the theory does exist).

I take my priest advice that while masturbation is a disordered act and not a good thing to partake of, it still does not bar a person from reception of Communion. Receiving frequently can actually lesson ones desire to commit this act. I have recently found this to be true, I stood away from Communion for two years because of great confusion and desire not to make a sacrilegious reception of the Eucharist. However when I started to receive again regularly not that long ago, I noticed that my passion and desire to commit this act actually declined. I can't explain it other then it is the grace of God which is lessening my desire for this disordered habit, but it does seem to be true in my case.

Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.

How is it a sin? Its something that happens naturally like peeing the bed. Your body vacates the stuff all on its own.

How can you say it's natural? Nature is affected by sin and death, so we have no idea what "natural" bodily functions are. "It's natural" is the same argument the homosexual crowd uses. It may be natural to any of us, but that does not make it objectively natural.

I do not think that you can equate masturbation and homosexuality. My guess is that something greater than 99% of all males masturbate. I don't think that there are anywhere near that number riding on the Hershey Highway. Using this theory, one would seem far more "natural" than the other.

On the other hand, tying masturbation to homosexuality does bring the potential sinfulness of the former more into focus, particularly for those like me that consider homosexuality a sinful way of life. If there is nothing sinful about ejaculation, why would it make a difference where it is done (other than the clear scriptural prohibitions against adultery, fornication, and one sex laying with the same sex as they would with another). However, the afore mentioned prohibitions usually have some deeper societal reason than simply “don’t do it there”. I could see where masturbation would have the same societal prohibition if a person preferred masturbation to marital sex. We also have the scriptural command to give our spouses their due. I am not sure the same would apply to a single person, or someone “taking care of a problem” when the spouse is not able (or for that matter, when they think enough of their spouse NOT to use them as a sex toy). In the latter case, it would be nice if the wife said “I’m sorry dear, but I am really tired tonight” you could reply “No problem honey, I can take care of this myself”. As it is, however, it seems that the only acceptable way to have sex is within the context of marital copulation. And yet, there are even those who would say that is “dirty”, particularly if either of the partners actually enjoyed it.

Yeah, If I was married then I don't think this issue would be coming up at all (Although I do have friends who are what they would call "stable" relation ships who boast about masturbating two times a day on top of the relations they have). So I guess that marriage, while helpful is not a cure all for this.

Logged

Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.-- Gustave Flaubert

Yes, I am well aware of those facts. This is not the only forum that I frequent, and I have seen some things in my life that I wish could be unseen. I just get tired of typing "homosexual", and I detest using the word "gay". The particular phrase in question seems nicer than some of the other terms that I have heard. And as to the anal issue; I am far more kindly disposed to the homosexuals than I am to the holier than thou evangelicals who, if they has as much poking out of them as they had in them would look like porcupines, yet think they are still virgins because they never had vaginal sex. And not just the girls, but the guys that don't think that oral and anal count as "real sex", so they are not committing fornication. That is one of the reasons that I think these kind of discussions are useful since they, hopefully, get to the root (no pun intended) of the issue, which is lust, and not just some contrived legal definition of the word "sex".

I do not think that you can equate masturbation and homosexuality. My guess is that something greater than 99% of all males masturbate.

That doesn't matter. 99% of males lie, commit adultery in their hearts, etc. too. Just because lots of people commit the same sin, does not mitigate its sinfulness.

And to homosexual people, it is as natural to lust after a fellow male or fellow female as it is for hetrosexual people to lust after the opposite sex. It does not matter how natural it is to other people, because naturalness is beside the point.

All sin is 100% unnatural when we compare ourselves to the innocence of prelapsarian Adam and Eve. Regaining that sinless innocence is our first step to theosis. "More" or "less" means nothing. It's not, so the degree only indicates the amount of struggle it will take to overcome.

In the latter case, it would be nice if the wife said “I’m sorry dear, but I am really tired tonight” you could reply “No problem honey, I can take care of this myself”.

Perhaps, but even that is not in line with the basic asceticism of Christianity. We don't just go and fulfill every urge that comes along. If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself. Just like we don't go and eat every time we want to, or go and flirt with every attractive person we see.

I do not think that you can equate masturbation and homosexuality. My guess is that something greater than 99% of all males masturbate.

That doesn't matter. 99% of males lie, commit adultery in their hearts, etc. too. Just because lots of people commit the same sin, does not mitigate its sinfulness.

And to homosexual people, it is as natural to lust after a fellow male or fellow female as it is for hetrosexual people to lust after the opposite sex. It does not matter how natural it is to other people, because naturalness is beside the point.

All sin is 100% unnatural when we compare ourselves to the innocence of prelapsarian Adam and Eve. Regaining that sinless innocence is our first step to theosis. "More" or "less" means nothing. It's not, so the degree only indicates the amount of struggle it will take to overcome.

In the latter case, it would be nice if the wife said “I’m sorry dear, but I am really tired tonight” you could reply “No problem honey, I can take care of this myself”.

Perhaps, but even that is not in line with the basic asceticism of Christianity. We don't just go and fulfill every urge that comes along. If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself. Just like we don't go and eat every time we want to, or go and flirt with every attractive person we see.

Perhaps, but even that is not in line with the basic asceticism of Christianity. We don't just go and fulfill every urge that comes along. If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself. Just like we don't go and eat every time we want to, or go and flirt with every attractive person we see.

Well really? That is your opinion. One could easily say that there is no excuse for the wife “not being interested” since there is a clear command for the wife (and this also applies to the husband) not to deny the husband in these matters. So, it would seem that scripturally it would be more acceptable to tell her “sorry, but it’s your duty” than to tell her “I’ll take care of it myself”. BTW – I do eat when I am hungry. I refrain from flirting because I read that is also forbidden for us married fellows.

Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.

Perhaps, but even that is not in line with the basic asceticism of Christianity. We don't just go and fulfill every urge that comes along. If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself. Just like we don't go and eat every time we want to, or go and flirt with every attractive person we see.

Well really? That is your opinion. One could easily say that there is no excuse for the wife “not being interested” since there is a clear command for the wife (and this also applies to the husband) not to deny the husband in these matters. So, it would seem that scripturally it would be more acceptable to tell her “sorry, but it’s your duty” than to tell her “I’ll take care of it myself”. BTW – I do eat when I am hungry. I refrain from flirting because I read that is also forbidden for us married fellows.

The is no variation of the fuehrer that could display the degree of disappointment here.

Thanks again for everyone advice. Again I'm going o continue to listen to the advice of my confessor on the matter. I thank all those who comments and am happy that you've helped ease my already troubled, OCD inflicted consciouses on this. It's important for us to trust the pastoral mercy and compassion that our confessors impart to us. Mine has been a priest for over fifty years (And is still Sharp as a tack). He's certainly "heard it all" in his day and I trust that his advice to me is sound (It seems to be helping me greatly).

Logged

Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.-- Gustave Flaubert

Thanks again for everyone advice. Again I'm going o continue to listen to the advice of my confessor on the matter. I thank all those who comments and am happy that you've helped ease my already troubled, OCD inflicted consciouses on this. It's important for us to trust the pastoral mercy and compassion that our confessors impart to us. Mine has been a priest for over fifty years (And is still Sharp as a tack). He's certainly "heard it all" in his day and I trust that his advice to me is sound (It seems to be helping me greatly).

There ya go!!...I am very happy you have someone you trust and I trust you when you say his own thinking is sound!!

We also have the scriptural command to give our spouses their due. I am not sure the same would apply to a single person, or someone “taking care of a problem” when the spouse is not able (or for that matter, when they think enough of their spouse NOT to use them as a sex toy).

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

What happens if the wife doesn't take care of it? How far are we permitted to go to avoid letting our spouse commit such a grievous sin. May we resort to physical correction? What about those of us who are single? We just have to sit around and suffer, huh?

What happens if the wife doesn't take care of it? How far are we permitted to go to avoid letting our spouse commit such a grievous sin. May we resort to physical correction?

LOL. Physical correction as in giving in or castration?

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

We also have the scriptural command to give our spouses their due. I am not sure the same would apply to a single person, or someone “taking care of a problem” when the spouse is not able (or for that matter, when they think enough of their spouse NOT to use them as a sex toy).

Even from a secular perspective, I cannot understand why sex is seen to be the one activity within the marriage which is exempt from the status of "duty".

Imagine this scenario:

*Wife comes home from a long day of work to husband who arrived home a few hours earlier*

Wife: Urgh, I had the worst day today -- I need to vent.Husband: Not today, honey, I have a headache.

No-one would tolerate this lack of regard for the needs and desires of the other in a non-bedroom context, yet somehow, according to the logic of the world, the only time sex can happen in a marriage is when both partners have an absolutely perfectly aligned desire for it.

I never understood the "I don't feel like it" excuse. Most people try to imitate logs as much as possible anyway, who would notice the difference? Lay down, let your significant other go at it, get up, move on.

What happens if the wife doesn't take care of it? How far are we permitted to go to avoid letting our spouse commit such a grievous sin. May we resort to physical correction?

LOL. Physical correction as in giving in or castration?

I was thinking along the lines of a beating

With whom beating what?

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth